What is my estimated FIDE rating if my standard time control rating on chess.com is 1242?
Sort:
Or anyone with almost the same rating as me on chess.com has a FIDE raitng?
?
Dec 15, 2017
0
#4
I think the best way to determine you FIDE rating is to play FIDE games. Or you can read a bunch of estimates here, and choose the one you like best.
9001!
Dec 15, 2017
0
#6
back in time someone made some stats and turned out that blitz at that time had the best correlation with chess.com rating and real elo, I usually estimate standard or daily chess to be aroung 200 points inflated compared to blitz, so I would guess somenthing aroud 1042.
anyway keep in mind that a correlation doesn't mean a cause and effect relation nor it is proof of anything, so basically I more reasonable answer should be that your rating could be anywhere from 800 up to 1.300 with best chances to be about the average.
What is "Not high enough for a book deal"?
17
JordanNexhip a écrit :
That's quite an old article. It was replaced back in 2015 and that is still probably out of date.
Dec 16, 2017
0
#11
JamesAgadir wrote:
JordanNexhip a écrit :
That's quite an old article. It was replaced back in 2015 and that is still probably out of date.
out of curiosity what is the most recent one?
by the way I did not checked the math but I do trust the work done making article, still the data I see there contradict my experience, speking about my rating (somenthing around 1.800 and 1900 in daily and somenthing around 1.600 and 1.700 in 3 min blitz) and other players with a comparable strenght I find 1.700 in blitz too high on average for a 1.800 daily player, I can't figure out at all a 1.800 daily rating corresponding on the average to 1.800 fide rating. My guess it's that even if the article is old it's rithwer that the number of data was not enough to have a a more precise result or either that there was some selection bias.
Dec 16, 2017
0
#12
I usually think of this when people ask this stuff
Q: What would be my FIDE rating?
A: Seven
Q: Seven?
Q: . . .
Q: Seven?
A: Umm, eight?
Dec 16, 2017
0
#13
If you want to be told you're amazing, take the Elo test meter thing, that gives people results that are +500 of their actual rating 
If you want the truth, look at your chess.com blitz, and if it's your first tournament then maybe even subtract a few 100 from that (because you wont be used to it).
So for you that's around 1000.
Could you do better? Yes, of course, but just so you don't get your hopes up I'd say something like 1000. That way you wont be disappointed (and may even be pleasantly surprised).
And remember tournaments are where you go for real practice, not as some kind of final test. So even if you lose all your games, that's fine, because you'll be stronger next time.
Dec 16, 2017
0
#14
Yeah, whatever it is, it's silly.
It said I was 2300 a few years ago.
I tried answering everything wrong on purpose and got 1200 or something (don't remember the actual number but it was really high for missing everything).
Dec 16, 2017
0
#16
I scored a little over 2300.
I saw near-beginners scoring stuff like 1700.
Dec 16, 2017
0
#17
it may be difficult to make a proper estimation, expecially based on a single person, but it seems reasonable to expect some kind of correlation between real elo rating and online ratings. For instance do you expect a NM having on the average a lower rating on a chess site than someone who's a couple of categories below in fide rating?
Dec 16, 2017
0
#18
it seems like a good guess...
by the way since asking for a direct conversion of the ratings it's not very precise I guess we can ask what is the smallest elo rating range within a given "reasonable" confidence interval.
for instance (I'm totally guessing numbers here...) I would say that I would believe that the OP could be 1046 + or - 100 points with a 50% of chance or more, anyway at the end it should all be about a bell curve.
my rating here is 400 points lower than my USCF rating but I like to drink and play, make a lot of moves without looking too hard, here and I resign games that are boring me.
cats-not-knights a écrit :
JamesAgadir wrote:
JordanNexhip a écrit :
That's quite an old article. It was replaced back in 2015 and that is still probably out of date.
out of curiosity what is the most recent one?
by the way I did not checked the math but I do trust the work done making article, still the data I see there contradict my experience, speking about my rating (somenthing around 1.800 and 1900 in daily and somenthing around 1.600 and 1.700 in 3 min blitz) and other players with a comparable strenght I find 1.700 in blitz too high on average for a 1.800 daily player, I can't figure out at all a 1.800 daily rating corresponding on the average to 1.800 fide rating. My guess it's that even if the article is old it's rithwer that the number of data was not enough to have a a more precise result or either that there was some selection bias.
Here it is I think https://www.chess.com/blog/smarterchess/chess-rating-comparison-2016 There will be some selection biased particularly for FIDE and USCF ratings because if yours is quite a bit lower than your raring on this site than you won't post it will if it's higher then you will. For instance I have a mediocre FIDE rating that I don't post.